| 1 |
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 17:21:45 +0100 |
| 2 |
Maciej Mrozowski <reavertm@××××××.fm> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Wednesday 31 of December 2008 16:57:12 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Gentoo does not comply with the FHS. It was established a long time |
| 5 |
> > ago that FHS is considered silly and any compliance is merely |
| 6 |
> > because the FHS people somehow managed to avoid screwing that |
| 7 |
> > particular area up. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Well, we're not here to deliberate about people's taste in FHS |
| 10 |
> silliness manner. FHS, being standard de-facto, following the |
| 11 |
> definition of the word "standard" as something accepted by majority |
| 12 |
> and thus promised to be respected. Not justified standard violations |
| 13 |
> or justified by "I don't like it" or "It's silly" should be repressed |
| 14 |
> and some good standards should be explicitly forced in my opinion. |
| 15 |
> Otherwise, inconsistency will create the feel of mess. I believe we |
| 16 |
> can agree on this. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
You could use the same argument to say "Gentoo must switch to RPM |
| 19 |
because LSB says so". |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives